... or maybe I've just never been invited to those meetings where everyone is told to start promoting the Torys in a subtle-yet-pervasive manner. Maybe that's some nek-level-freemason shit that I'm not yet privvy to.

or maybe I've just never been invited to those meetings where everyone is told to start promoting the Torys in a subtle-yet-pervasive manner.

There are explicit editorial lines (read: endorsements, which are rare in New Zealand, possibly unheard of), editorial allegiances (less uncommon), the choice of columnists (crucial) and then there is the manner in which politics is covered. Seeing as the country lacks a robust political periodical, or even a weekly willing to go into the necessary depth (is Jane Clifton really the best we can do?), we're pretty much stuch with inside baseball 24/7. And inside baseball implicitly favours the right wing approach to politics, in that it glosses over serious, knotty political debates, completely overlooks the material conditions that underlie them (including the issue of class), makes governing less important than personalities,

Case in point: have you heard much in the last month about the actual political differences between Cunliffe and Shearer?

Oh goody, that's settled. Now, after the media has formally introduced us to our new savior, and all the dust of this stupid process has settled, we might begin to hear what actually matters coming from Labour. What the fuck are they going to do?

On a side note, something that I've long felt once more raises its head. I no longer have an electorate representative. I voted for Shearer to do what's right by my electorate, but now he's going to be far too important and busy for any of that.

Not that I'd ever avail myself anyway. I expect the local swimming pool that has been slated almost as long as national broadband, will end up being built by the headmaster of the local primary school. At least someone has a plan.

Case in point: have you heard much in the last month about the actual political differences between Cunliffe and Shearer?

I have not. I specifically asked them, as they invited on Red Alert. Shearer's answer was so vague it was no answer. Cunliffe at least admitted to the question being curly (which it was). Robertson had some much more promising suggestions, and Mahuta actually spoke of specifics. It would seem that the more they refer to policy, the less their chance of leadership.

I'm glad you brought up Robertson, who is much liked around here. Can anybody tell me what he stands for? I've been following him for a bit - he's the MP of my neighbouring electorate, was special education spokesperson for some time - and I haven't been able to work it out at all.

I agree that we're not particularly well served in that regard. Although, free world, anyone should feel open to to set up a robust political periodical if they want. And these days I'd include the blogosphere, PAS, Pundit etc into the wider conversation - especially when you consider how many people read some magazines these days.

I'm sure you have your reasons for thinking so, but isn't it possible that rather than favouring the right, 'inside baseball' simply favours whichever 'team' has the most charismatic leader, and that could vary from time to time to either side? Because while you might not agree with them, there is such a thing as a serious, knotty political debate around policies promoted by the right too. It's just that at the moment they know it's easier to say, "ohhh look, there's John Key!" I'm sure Don Brash, Lindsay Perigo, and any number of Act followers would feel similarly ripped off by the MSM's shallow focus.

I voted for Shearer to do what’s right by my electorate, but now he’s going to be far too important and busy for any of that.

I always assume anything that needs to be done in my area will be done by the council. Those other folk are all too busy down in Wellington trying to defeat each other's plans for global domination. :)

I'm sure you have your reasons for thinking so, but isn't it possible that rather than favouring the right, 'inside baseball' simply favours whichever 'team' has the most charismatic leader, and that could vary from time to time to either side?

Yes, but it constrains political debate across the board, and I think it's a far greater constraint on the side that places a greater emphasis on the power of politics to transform society - which, I think we can probably agree, is the Left.

And by the way the degree in which I identify the Left with the New Zealand Labour Party is... small.

Although, free world, anyone should feel open to to set up a robust political periodical if they want.

I assume that you are fully aware of the irony of advocating a free-market solution to this problem

I always assume anything that needs to be done in my area will be done by the council. Those other folk are all too busy down in Wellington trying to defeat each other's plans for global domination. :)

Me too, which is why I find electorates to be a strangely archaic idea. If they want people to be able to randomly contact them for help, then the party could put offices wherever they like, whether they win or not. In what way is Shearer (whose office is further from me than Cunliffe's) uniquely empowered to help me if I've got some strange dispute that defies all other processes?

I lived in Mt Albert, only a 1 min walk from Clark's office, for 5 years, never saw her even once. The only time her little building was of any note was the night that Tim Selwyn lobbed an axe through the window of it, and was sent to prison forthwith. Not democracy's finest hour in NZ.

Treating politics as a sporting contest alongside rugby and cricket *does* favour the right, because it encourages people to disregard the issues and just vote for "their team" or the "smiley guy" (as if it was the RWC entertainment rounds and they pick Narnia cos they've got a cool flag).

If people actually thought about actual issues and how it impacted them, the NACT vote would be a lot smaller - the 1%, and those with a delusional aspiration to that status.

Yes, I had seen that, but you didn't ask him a question about his politics, you asked him a process question.

I'm not entirely sure there's a major distinction. The way in which a political party chooses its people is a very political question. He had every opportunity to suggest that he favored a more democratic process than the conclave we have just seen the smoke from.

The basic rampant lion concept is sound and well-rendered, but red on green is a terrible combination and it needs a lot more contrast to be legible from a distance. Completely hopeless for the colour-blind.

We do have a coat of arms, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coat_of_arms_of_New_Zealand(heh Sinister Supporter).The whole leader thing has got me thinking about out of date leaders, one person party leaders, opposition party leader, governor general, leader of the house, SOE CEO, then I got bored.